Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Alok Aradhe, JJ.
Lucknow Public School, Eldico And Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 15499 of 2026 @ Diary No. 60657 of 2024
Decided On : 28-04-2026
(A) Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 12 – Constitution of India – Article 21A – Admission of students into neighbourhood school – Right to education, a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21A of Constitution, will remain empty promise if mandate of RTE Act, 2009 is not worked out in its letter and spirit – Once Government assesses application for admission under 2009 Act, school shall proceed and be bound by other provisions as laid from time to time – Limited window for school to reconsider Government’s decision is a conscious choice of State to avoid delays in securing children's right to education – Obligation of a “neighbourhood school” to admit children belonging to weaker and disadvantaged sections of our society, to the extent of twenty-five percent of class strength, under Section 12 of RTE Act, 2009 has extraordinary capacity to transform social structure of our society – Earnest implementation can truly be transformative – Ensuring admission of such students must be a national mission and obligation of appropriate Government and local authority – Equally, Courts, be it constitutional or civil, must walk that extra mile to provide easy access and efficient relief to parents who complain of denial of right. (Paras 5, 7 and 9)
(B) Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 12 – U.P. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 – Rule 8 – Constitution of India – Article 21A – Admission of students into neighbourhood school – Legislative choice to implement right to free and compulsory education through neighborhood schools is not merely administrative; it is a deliberate constitutional strategy to operationalise equality of status, dignity, and social integration among children in their formative years – Mandate under Section 12 of Act must be enforced with conviction and commitment – We have to ensure admission of at least twenty-five percent of class strength in unaided schools with children of weaker and disadvantaged groups – This is a national mission – Effective implementation requires that schools publish available seats well in advance and that any denial of admission be recorded with specific reasons, which must be reviewed by educational authorities within strict timelines to ensure accountability – For schools like petitioner that may have some disagreement with selection by Government, can make representation to concerned authority, but they ought not wait for outcome of such representation and are mandated to grant admission to student whose name finds mention in list forwarded to school in interregnum – This immediacy is essential to actualise promise of Article 21A of Indian Constitution. (Paras 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15)
Facts of the case:
This is yet another occasion for Court to reiterate constitutional and statutory obligation of a ‘neighbourhood school’ to give admission to students forwarded by State Government without any delay. Such obligation is consistent with constitutional philosophy [Article 21A], Section 12 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 as well as Rule 8 of U.P Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011.
Findings of Court:
In view of the foregoing discussion, Court not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
Result : Special Leave Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. schools must admit state-forwarded rte students promptly. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. rte rules make state admission process binding on schools. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. neighbourhood schools' 25% quota promotes social integration. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. five duty bearers accountable for rte enforcement. (Para 10) |
| 5. section 12 requires committed implementation for equality. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. grant admission immediately; represent eligibility doubts separately. (Para 14) |
| 7. high court admission order affirmed; petition dismissed. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Delay condoned.
2. This is yet another occasion for us to reiterate the constitutional and statutory obligation of a ‘neighbourhood school’ to give admission to students forwarded by the State Government without any delay. Such an obligation is consistent with the constitutional philosophy1[Article 21A], Section 12 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 20092[Hereinafter referred to as ‘RTE Act, 2009’], as well as Rule 8 of the U.P Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 20113[Hereinafter referred to as the ‘UP RTE Rules, 2011’]. For the reasons to follow, we have affirmed the direction of the High Court to grant admission to the respondent without any delay.
3. The facts leading to filing of the present Special Leave Petition are that the respondent no. 5 (‘student’) applied to the Basic Education Department, State of Uttar Pradesh, for admission into pre-primary class in a neighbourhood school in accordance with the procedure prescribed under UP RTE Rules, 2011 for the year 2024-25. The student was duly selected, and the published list containing her name was sent to the petitioner school for admission into the pre-primary class.
4. On being selected and allotted to the petitioner school, the student approached the school for completing the admission formalities, but she was neither given admission nor permitted to attend the classes on the ground that there is some uncertainty about the student’s eligibility. Under these circumstances the student preferred a writ petition4[WRIT - C No. - 6121 of 2024.] praying for a direction to the State and other authorities for granting admission into the petitioner school. High Court allowed the writ petition primarily on the ground that schools cannot sit in appeal over a decision taken by the State Government. The relevant portion of the impugned order is as follows:
9. Considering the entire scheme of the Act and Rules made thereunder, it is noticed that once the process of admission is completed and application forms have been duly scrutinized and list is prepared allocating the children the school and the said list being forwarded to the said school, the school has no option except to grant admission to the students.”
5. There is no gainsaying in stating that the right to education, a fundamental right guaranteed unde
Admission of students into neighbourhood school – Obligation of a “neighbourhood school” to admit children belonging to weaker and disadvantaged sections of our society, to the extent of twenty-five ....
The obligation of neighborhood schools to admit 25% of children from weaker sections under the Right to Education Act is a constitutional mandate that requires effective implementation through enforc....
The Amendment Rules exempting private unaided schools from admitting 25% disadvantaged children based on proximity to government schools violate the RTE Act and Article 21-A, as they impose condition....
The right to education under the RTE Act does not guarantee admission to a specific school, and residency criteria based on wards must be clarified by the State.
The Right to Education Act aims to ensure educational access for underprivileged children, and rigid adherence to distance criteria that denies admission contradicts this purpose.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
